People v Jerez

G.R. No. 114385 January 29, 1998

Topic – Counsel of Choice, Extrajudicial Confession

Facts

Appellant Efren Jerez, along with Joselito Quijan, Zaldy Victa and Efren Bola, were charged with the
crime of robbery with double homicide.

Police Major Roberto Rosales testified that upon appellant's arrest, the latter was apprised of his
constitutional rights. In the presence of Atty. August Schneider, an investigation conducted by the police
ensued and statements therein were reduced to writing, signed and sworn to before Jose Panganiban
Municipal Mayor Arnie Arenal, who likewise inquired whether or not appellant understood the
consequences of his confession.

Appellant argued that the trial court erred when it denied his right to have an independent counsel of
his own choice.

Issue

Whether or not the extra-judicial statement was valid

Held

Yes. While the initial choice of the lawyer in cases where a person under custodial investigation cannot
afford the services of a lawyer or (where the preferred lawyer is available as in the case at bar) is
naturally lodged in the police investigators, the accused has the final choice as he may reject the counsel
chosen for him and ask for another one. A lawyer provided by the investigators is deemed engaged by
the accused where he never raised any objection against the former's appointment during the course of
the investigation and the accused thereafter subscribes to the veracity of his statement before the
swearing officer. Excerpts of the extra-judicial confession shows that when Major Rosales suggested that
Atty. Schneider, supposedly the only lawyer available in Jose Panganiban, appear as the counsel of
appellant during investigation, the latter answered in the affirmative.

The Court, therefore, finds that appellant's constitutional right to counsel was not breached when he
agreed to be represented by Atty. Schneider.